|
|
Re: Fed up customer - Unreliable Vehicle
Dear Pieter
Further to our meeting of yesterday morning I would like to place my unhappiness
on written
record.
My wife’s vehicle is a 2000 Range Rover 4.6 HSE Automatic. In the past
four months this vehicle has had far too many technical problems
that have kept it out of service. I would not expect to experience these repeated
problems
from any mid-range vehicle let alone a “top of the range” product.
I am extremely concerned
about the poor reliability of this vehicle.
In early November 2002, on my return journey from Botswana the vehicle made
a terrible
whining noise from the front axle as soon as I exceeded 80 km/h. On my return
it was
diagnosed as a faulty front diff. Due to unavailability of parts the vehicle
was unavailable for
ten days. I was only offered a rental vehicle after I made a lot of fuss.
Shortly thereafter the vehicle was in again for a day or two to have a faulty
alternator
replaced.
In early December (only two weeks after this second incident) the vehicle was
towed in to
Waterford after it overheated in Bryanston on my way home from work. The thermostat
was
replaced.
Shortly before Christmas the vehicle was towed in to Waterford for a second
time after it
overheated again on my way home from Christmas shopping on a Saturday afternoon.
The
vehicle was in your workshop for four days but the service department was unable
to locate a
problem with overheating and so it was released to me with the assurance that
there was no
problem. (During the time that the vehicle was in on this occasion the vehicle
was given its
40 000 km service)
On 4 January 2003 the vehicle again broke down with the exact same overheating
problem.
This time we were stuck 10km outside Pongola in northern KZN, without an air
conditioner
and an outside shade temperature of 32 degrees Centigrade.
The service that we received from Land Rover Assist / Land Rover Customer Services
/ Avis
Car Rental, in their pleasantly cooled offices, was appalling. Their first offer
was to fetch us
and the broken vehicle and tow us on a flat bed truck back to the nearest dealership
in
Empangeni – some 400 km in the wrong direction! They wanted us to wait
for the vehicle to
be repaired and then drive home! One hour later, after explaining that this
was unacceptable
and that I wanted a rental vehicle to get home, Avis Richard’s Bay was
about to dispatch a
rental vehicle for delivery to us on the back of a flat bed truck because they
had no driver!
Again after explaining to them that this was 400 km away and I would be lucky
to see this
rental vehicle the same day, they said that they would send a vehicle from Manzini
in
Swaziland. Finally, some three hours after making our first phone call for help
they still had
not dispatched a rental vehicle for us to make our way home and I got a call
from someone at
Avis in Swaziland asking me (stuck on the side of the road in Pongola) to fax
him directions
of how to get from Swaziland to Pongola because he did not have a map!
That was the final straw and I organized for somebody from Johannesburg to come
and fetch
us in Pongola. I eventually paid a local farmer R400 to take us from Pongola
to Piet Retief in
order to reduce the time. If we had waited for Land Rover Assist / Land Rover
Customer
Services / Avis Car Rental to sort out the problem and had not organized ourselves,
I am
convinced that we would still be in Pongola!
The vehicle is now at Land Rover in Empangeni and we are without a vehicle again.
I do not
know when to expect it back in Johannesburg.
This Range Rover was bought because it was supposed to be a safe and reliable
vehicle for
my wife and the children. Having been stuck on the side of the road three times
in the last
two months (thankfully each time without a security incident) and having had
the other
problems described above, I have lost all faith in this vehicle and no longer
wish to subject
my wife to the safety hazards or inconveniences of this nature in the future.
I do not want this
vehicle any more as it is quite clearly a faulty product.
I might add that despite the fact that my wife again does not have use of the
vehicle because
of your product unreliability, we are left to pay the R8300 monthly finance
installments. This
on top of the fact that we have just paid R4500 for a service really infuriates
me.
Having had some time to consider the three options below put to us yesterday
morning, I
consider all three to be wholly unsuitable and embarrassing that you would even
consider
these as acceptable, as we as the injured party are left baring the brunt of
the inconvenience
and costs again. Although I appreciate the fact that you said that you are on
our side and want
to help, I trust that on further consideration you will realise that we have
been offered nothing
as yet.
Option 1: Land Rover SA assisted trade in / swap vehicle.
Conceptually this is all good and well, but nothing concrete has been offered
to us, which
makes it an impossible option for us to consider. One thing is however certain;
we are not
interested in incurring any further costs.
Option 2: Waterford to sell vehicle on a consignment basis and give us R370
000 out.
The long and the short of this offer is that you expect us to continue to pay
monthly finance
costs while the vehicle sits on your floor while you try to sell it without
any guarantees
regarding price or maximum time to sell. This as you quite clearly stated could
go on for 300
days as you have had Range Rovers in stock for this period in the past. Given
our finance and
insurance costs of approximately R9000 per month, 300 days equates to 10 months
or some
R90 000 possible downside on my part. You can’t honestly believe that this
is a risk that
anyone with even the most miniscule business acumen would accept as reasonable,
let alone
attractive. There is absolutely no financial incentive for you to sell the vehicle
quickly. What
dealer would not jump at such a one sided opportunity? I think that it is safe
to say that
Option 2 cannot even be considered as an offer.
Option 3: Waterford to buy the vehicle outright for R300 000.
I find this offer even more offensive than Option 2. First you sell us an unreliable
vehicle
then after months of frustration you offer to buy it back for R55 000 less than
our current
settlement figure. Furthermore, the current Auto Dealers Guide recommended trade
price is
R31 000 more than your offer! Yet again, what dealer would not jump at such
a one sided
opportunity, especially given the very low mileage and immaculate condition
of the vehicle,
as recognized by yourselves when you stated that this vehicle is one of the
better vehicles
serviced at Waterford. You guys could potentially end up making a substantial
profit out of
our miserable experience.
I think that upon reflection you will easily see that in all the above options
I am the one
drawing the considerably shorter straw and that these options are insensitive
at best and
downright unethical at worst. In each case I am expected to throw more good
money after
bad. In fact I fail to see where it is that yourselves or Land Rover South Africa
are assisting
us at all.
The days of me drawing the short straw are now over. Please convey my extreme
unhappiness to Land Rover South Africa and ask them to assist in this matter.
I look forward to your urgent response and trust that this matter will be resolved
ensuring that
I am finally left as a highly satisfied customer.
Kind regards
From my first letter to Land Rover SA dated 7 January, the chronology continues
as
follows:
The Range Rover was sent to Land Rover in Empangeni. In a meeting with Pieter
Steyn on Monday 6 January (at which they made the 3 pathetic verbal offers
described in the first letter) we were promised that the vehicle would be repaired
at
Empangeni and returned without delay. We were told that we could expect it back
by
Friday 10 January. Clearly Friday came and went and the vehicle was not delivered.
On Tuesday 14 January I telephoned the Land Rover SA head office in order to
speak
to Moira Moses (then MD Land Rover SA). I was told that she was unavailable
and so
I left a brief message explaining my unhappiness and asked to be called back.
The call
was never returned. During the same week I spoke to the service manager at
Empangeni who told me that the vehicle had been repaired by replacing the head
gasket and that they were awaiting transport for the vehicle to Johannesburg.
That
same week I was contacted by Natasha of Land Rover SA Customer Care to be given
an update. She asked me whether I was going to fetch my vehicle from Empangeni!
When I told her that it was their responsibility to get it back to me she assured
me that
the vehicle would be transported back to Johannesburg by carrier and that the
vehicle
would not be driven back. Friday 17 January came and went without the return
of the
vehicle.
On Tuesday 21 January my wife Sarah received a call from someone at Waterford
saying “we have just received a call from your driver Alfred telling us
that your
Range Rover has broken down on route from Empangeni to Johannesburg”. When
Sarah explained that she does not have a driver called Alfred and that the vehicle
was
in fact in their care and that it was supposed to be being transported back
on a flat bed
truck there was a stoney silence with the promise of a quick response. Minutes
later
she received a call from Bruce (Service Manager at Waterford) to say that there
had
been a mix up and that in fact it was the flat bed that had broken down and
that the
vehicle had not been driven. This was a blatant lie. The vehicle had been driven
and
had overheated again, completely destroying the engine. It was returned the
rest of the
way to Johannesburg on a flat bed truck.
On either Thursday 23 January or Friday 24 January I again expressed my grave
concerns regarding the reliability of the vehicle at a meeting with Pieter Steyn
and
insisted that we get the involvement of the most senior Land Rover SA officials
or his
direct superiors at the Southern Motor Group. Pieter assured me that his boss
would
be unable to do anything more than he himself was able to do and that Dewalt
van
Bergen (Land Rover SA Customer Care Manager) was in fact the correct individual
to
handle this matter. It was decided that the entire motor had to be replaced
under
warranty.
After explaining my security issues to Dewalt van Bergen as well as the fact
that I had
made enquiries about the salability of the vehicle with a new engine from other
dealers and that the vehicle was now worth even less to potential buyers (as
a result of
the engine change) I received no acknowledgement of the financial loss that
I was
expected to take from either Dewalt van Bergen (on behalf of LRSA) or Pieter
Steyn
(on behalf of Waterford Land Rover)as a result of their faulty product. Land
Rover
simply pointed to their warranty conditions that essentially state “fix
or replace” and
said that they would replace the engine and extend the warranty on the motor
for a
further year. Initially they wanted the extended warranty to be non-transferable!
This
they described as their “final management decision” in their letter
dated 31 January.
My final attempt to get some decent management attention drawn to this matter
was
the lawyer’s letter of 10 February, written to Paul Malhuish (new MD Land
Rover
SA) by Derek Spiers of Routledge Modise. We have received no response to this
letter.
At my meeting with Pieter Steyn on Thursday 23 January, he assured me that
as a
goodwill gesture, because he had been unable to give me what I had asked for,
he
would ensure that the new engine was fitted perfectly and gave me his personal
undertaking that he would get his “best technician to give the vehicle
a thorough
check to ensure that everything was a hundred percent prior to delivering the
vehicle
back to me. It was returned to my house in Bryanston on Thursday 13 February.
Despite the fact that I had given possession of my vehicle to an LRSA agent
with a
full tank of petrol on 3 January (having filled the vehicle in Pongola) it was
returned
to me with the reserve light already on. Clearly no thought or management time
had
been spent on ensuring that the vehicle was returned in a satisfactory condition.
On Sunday afternoon 16 January at about 16h00 on my way home from cricket with
my three year old daughter, wife and aunt in the car we were called upon to
give
assistance to my female cousin who had suffered a blow out on the N1 south on
the
way to Potchefstroom. We duly proceeded to the scene only to find out that she
was
stuck on the N1 south under the Randshow Rd Bridge directly outside the entrance
to
SOWETO. Having organized assistance from the AA for my cousin we wanted to
depart only to find that the Range Rover, that had allegedly been repaired and
returned to us not even three days ago would not start. The dashboard display
stated
“gearbox failure” as the problem. We had to call Land Rover assist
to have the vehicle
towed away again. During the time that we were stopped at this location prior
to Land
Rover agents arriving we had two very nervous tow truck agents and a police
officer
stop to inform us that this was a very dangerous location and that we should
move
away from it as soon as possible. None of the three wanted to remain on the
scene but
I eventually convinced the police officer to remain with us until help arrived.
I am
well aware of this fact having had a brick thrown through the windscreen of
my
vehicle at this very intersection some time ago. Unfortunately we were unable
to
move away as the unreliable vehicle had let us down again.
I telephoned Paul Malhuish on his cellular phone on Sunday 16 January while
at the
scene to voice my displeasure. I left a message on his answer machine for him
to
return my call. I have received no response.
Apart from the substantial cost implications to myself and the irritations
of not having
a vehicle at my disposal, I have now been stuck on the side of the road in this
vehicle
four times in the last three months. This is an unacceptable security risk to
my family
and myself. Will Waterford Land Rover and LRSA step up and take responsibility
for
their faulty product and service only after a member of my family has been raped
or
some other terrible security hazard as befallen us? I am not prepared to allow
my
family to be the victim of their faulty product. Should these parties not satisfactorily
compensate me for these hazards and material damages that I have suffered I
will be
taking public action against them in the South African media. It is high time
that the
parties stopped shirking their responsibilities towards unsuspecting consumers
that
have shown a tremendous amount of patience.